Sex EducationSex education in the United States has experienced serious changes over the past three decades. It all started in 1981 the Reagan Administration, with federal funding promoting abstinence-only-until-marriage to sex education programs. The support of this abstinence only until marriage idea has increased exponentially since 1996. Although this approach seen to be beneficial to many in the sense at rates of teen pregnancy would decrease. Many others see the prohibitive nature of this approach to be controversial. The public also show the need for sex education programs to include not only abstinence but also to include information about contraceptives as well. This excessive priority on promoting only one sex-education method seems to be at odds with what the high mass of adults and teenagers think is more important. For example in a the national survey published in 2007, out of 1000 adults and 100 teenagers organized by the National Campaign to Prevent teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. In the survey it was acknowledged that even though most of adults (93%) and teens (90%) believe that providing young teens with information about abstinence is an important message to give out. In the same survey more than the half of adults (73%) and teens (56%) also believed that the young people need way more information about abstinence and contraception than what they are given today, rather than either/or.

These results of having teens comprehend sex education are more consistent with the previous survey conducted such as programs that rather only promote abstinence-only-until-marriage. More surveys have shows the promoting abstinence only has become more ineffective. The medical journal Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescents Medicine in 2005 to 2006 performed a surveys resulting with overwhelming support of 83% for a comprehensive approach and with only 36% supporting only abstinence education. In the January and February 2007 issue of Public health Reports announced that premarital sex is not out of the ordinary as many would think it is. According to the reports by the age 20, 77% of applicants have had sex, 75% have had premarital sex, and 12% had married; by the age 44, 95% of the applicants have had premarital sex. After these results, many people argue that abstinence-only-until-marriage programs are neither practical nor realistic now days. Randy Elder a task force member of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported in November 2009 Washington Post articles stating that “There is sufficient evidence that comprehensive risk reduction efforts are effective.” He further explains “As regards abstinence education, after a similar look the task force determined that based on a number of problems with the studies presented to them there was insufficient evidence to determine their effectiveness.” Author Kat long informs in her March 2008 article for the Gay Gender issues Web site called “Abstinence Teaching Ignores LSBT’s.” In her article it reads “There rules imply that lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender students will not fit into the ‘expected standards’ of human sexuality. They also infer same-sex relationships are less meaningful and legitimate than opposite-sex ones and may cause ‘harmful’ effects.” Also according to analysis by the Washington University law Review in an article titled “Abstinence-only Education Fails African American Youth’. This article states that “Black adolescents’ higher rates of sexual activity couple with evidence of their fundamentally different attitudes towards sex relative to Whites adolescents suggest that abstinence-only sex education is bound to be ineffective among Black youth.” Some policies changes that are about to happen be President Obama appears to be ready to sign into law the 2010 Omnibus Appropriations Bill passed by the Congress in December 2009. This would be the first time since 1981 that abstinence-only-until-marriage sex education programs will not...

YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL

...How to teach school based programs on sexuality and sexual health is a hot topic in today's society. The government, including President Bush, has stated that schools should implement abstinence only' teaching programs to educate students to wait until marriage to engage in sexual activity. However, there is a small amount of statistical data and positive results documented to support this intervention about sexual health. Is it truly the most effective way to prevent students from participating in sexual activities before marriage? The reality is that in 2002, "the proportion of never-married females aged 1519 who had ever had sexual intercourse was 46 percent." (Center for Disease Control, 2). This is an astounding number and it certainly seems that an abstinence only approach is not effective.
I believe that the abstinence-only program sets non-realistic goals that are almost never met. Also, a majority of them do not provide education on contraceptive use, abortion, or sexuality. These are essential factors that students want to know more about and need to know. Perhaps the most outrageous comment about why abstinence programs should be used states that, "Sexual abstinence could protect you from being victimized or manipulated by older boys to engage in sex." (Zanis, 59). In other words, they are saying that if the students are educated to not engage in sexual activity at all before marriage, that girls will not...

...and polls on how America feels about sex education and on how it should be taught. With these feelings many studies have brought to light on how young America’s youth is engaging in sexual activity. This paper will tell a hard realization of facts and how to go about helping youth with abstinence and for those who are not, safe sex. The sooner that sex education can be taught, the better. If middle school students aren’t taught, learning sex education for the first time in high school can be too late.
Today many parents would not disagree with a sex education course in their child’s curriculum in school. A study done on if sex education should be taught in schools, only seven percent of Americans said that sex education should not be discussed in school ("Sex education in," 2004). The role of educators can be very important in giving information about abstinence, safe sex, or the combination. Millions of dollars over the years have been given to abstinence programs, but sexual activity, sexually transmitted diseases, and pregnancies seem to be increasing in teenagers (Banks, 2010). The main goal in teaching sex education in middle schools would be to explain thoroughly the heath risks involved, how to resist peer pressure, and safe...

...Sex Education in Schools
In school, students acquire many subjects, not just the basics but also the topics parents lack in teaching such as sex education. Assuming that every child has a parent willing to educate them on this issue is impractical; therefore, it becomes the responsibility of the school to educate children on harder topics that they will encounter in their daily lives. It is important for adolescence to be educated about sex before they make imprudent decisions that could impact the rest of their lives; however, the debate amongst parents, politicians, and educators used to be whether or not sex education should be taught in schools at all, but now the debate has shifted to how it should be taught. Many schools implement an abstinence only education program which emphasizes that the only way to avoid pregnancy or disease is to not engage in sexual activity. However, due to recent findings schools are starting to shift towards a comprehensive program which teaches various ways of preventing pregnancy and disease while still informing students of both abstinence and contraception use (Advocates for Youth, 2001). Research has shown that a comprehensive sex education program should be used in schools because is more effective than abstinence only education at delaying the commencement of...

... Should sex education be taught in schools? There had been many debates over this. They say that sex education only destroys the morality of people because they think that sex education teaches students about how sexual intercourse is done. Although sex education lowers the morality of people by teaching students how to use condoms and contraceptives, it should be taught in primary school and secondaryschool because (a) it prevents sexual diseases and teenage pregnancy, (b) it is indeed a need in case of parents’ absence, and (c) it gives children the idea of what is right and what is wrong.
Others say that having sex education only encourages the students to engage in sexual intercourse and that it leads to sexual diseases and teenage pregnancy. The truth is that sex education does not encourage students to do it. According to Bleakley(2006), in a survey conducted, only about seventeen percent of the respondents answered that sex education does encourage them to do “it” and that the remaining eighty three percent strongly disagreed. Sex education prevents sexual diseases and teenage pregnancy. But how? Students are taught how to use condoms. According to Masland(n.d.), kids are becoming more sexually active at an earlier age. Sixty-six percent of high school students in America have done...

...Sex Education in High SchoolsSex education at the high school level in the United States has been based on social trends, public health concerns, politics and other various controversies (FoSE 1). Overtime, however, one thing has remained consistent, the polarizing effect of this issue to the American public. According to the article Sex Education in America, written by the National Public Radio, in recent studies, only seven percent of Americans say that sex educations should not be taught in schools (1). Though the American public seems to overwhelmingly support the teaching of sex education, many others oppose. Opponents argue that schools should not have the right of teaching young people about a deeply personal matter that belongs entirely to families and their religious beliefs. They also argue that sex education encourages too-early sexual activity, and that schools are infringing on parental rights and authority (FoSE 1).
Throughout the 1980s, these arguments began to lose legitimacy as the American public reiterated its support, research convincingly refuted the idea that teaching sex education encouraged sexual activity, and more attention was being paid to the high rates of teen pregnancy. As the 1980s drew to a close, the entire country was paying attention to the new AIDS epidemic. With...

...Anderson, M.. "SEX EDUCATION AND RAPE. " Michigan Journal of Gender & Law 17.1 (2010): 83-110. GenderWatch (GW), ProQuest. Web.
Michelle Anderson is the Dean of CUNY School of Law, acting as a leading scholar in rape law. Her article entitled “Sex Education and Rape” explains the basis of consent pertaining to rape and teens’ sexual experience. It also examines messages about sex contained in popular culture and, most important for this presentation, describes the formal sex education given in school. At the end, it gives suggestions on how teens should be taught to negotiate sex. In section III, it goes over how abstinence based education is very limited in scope and advocates that, “You should wait until marriage before engaging in sex (heterosexual, vaginal penetration), and sexual abstinence is the only sure way to protect yourself from pregnancy and STDs.” Despite this, abstinence-based sex education does not do a good job conveying its main message since “40 percent of students report that they feel unprepared or only somewhat prepared to wait until they are older to have sex.” Sexual education in U.S. schools is therefore heavily based on a principle, abstinence, which it does not necessarily teach students to follow. (Katie)
Anonymous. "Young adults support sex ed, but have mixed views on...

...Introduction
My paper examines the issues relating to sex education programs in high school which has been a controversial subject since its inception. It evaluates how the recent increase in sexual activity among teenagers indicates that the subject should be revisited for further inspection and scrutiny. It shows how opponents of sexual education in schools argue that the subject promotes promiscuity and liberal sexual attitudes in teenage students whereas supporters of sexual education programs believe that they often reduce the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases as well as unwanted pregnancies. It also looks at how these courses often usurp the role of parents in the education of their teenage sons and daughters as well as alternative programs such as abstinence programs which typically promote sex after marriage.
Herlinda Garcia
English 101
Professor F. Case
May 5, 2010
Sex Education in High School
Sexual education in high school has been a controversial subject since its inception. The recent increase in sexual activity amongst teenagers indicates that the subject should be revisited for further inspection and scrutiny. Opponents of sexual education in schools argue that the subject promotes promiscuity and liberal sexual attitudes in teenage students. On the other hand, supporters of sexual education programs believe that they often...

...Teen sex was rarely talked about in the 19th century but that changed in the 20th century with the coming of new attitudes and values dealing with sex and the growth of public high schools which brought girls and boys together in an institutional setting that fostered greater contact and intimacy. In today’s society, teen sex, sex before marriage and even teen pregnancy is becoming more acceptable because it is a recurring activity. Sex education has always been a controversial part of education and has endured numerous changes due to the debate of the subject. Should the emphasis be on encouraging young people to abstain from sex period otherwise known as a “only-abstinence program” or should sex education emphasize on the consequences of being engaged in sexual activity and provide clear information on the risks of STD’s and how to stay protected?
It still surprises me today in the 21st century to hear people state that having sex is a moral issue when times have changed so much. Moralists state that you are only allowed sex if you are married, there should be no other excuse for this action. In recent centuries abstaining from sex or having the chastity belt was the concepts they went by, it is crazy to think women were far more mistreated about sexual activity then men. Young men were allowed to go out engage...